Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.

Deathfrogg:Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.

And where's the congressmember to introduce such a measure? Anybody? Surely there is one with the courage to bring this up.

Deathfrogg:Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors

Deathfrogg:Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.

socoloco:Deathfrogg: Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.

"Had the U.S. authorities decided to press criminal charges," said Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer at a press conference to announce the settlement, "HSBC would almost certainly have lost its banking license in the U.S., the future of the institution would have been under threat and the entire banking system would have been destabilized."

Deathfrogg:Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.

Real answer? Because all that poses no credible threat to the life, liberty and wealth of individual bankers. It is only the credible threat to spending the next several decades getting cornholed by Bubba in cell block D, along with impoverishing your children, seeing you hottie wife divorce you for some other banker, and people making Bernie Maddoff jokes about you that will change behaviors.

And of course, this guy made the unfortunate choice of being born brown...throw him under the bus!

"You may say that I've grown bitter but of this you may be sure,the rich have got their channels in the bedrooms of the poor,and there's a mighty judgment comingbut I may be wrong.You see, you hear these funny voices in the tower of song."

Deathfrogg:Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.

The problem is, if you shut down all or most of the largest banks in the country, unemployment would go to 25% or so overnight. The point of a bank is that it loans money to other companies and individuals; if all of those people and companies started having serious trouble getting loans, the economy would crash and another recession would start.

One problem with articles like this is they never list any specific people who "should" have been prosecuted but weren't. The number could be zero, for all I know. Give some specifics, man, not "bankers suck and the government sucks" generic crap.

Geotpf:One problem with articles like this is they never list any specific people who "should" have been prosecuted but weren't. The number could be zero, for all I know. Give some specifics, man, not "bankers suck and the government sucks" generic crap.

No GED in law, and Nancy Grace notwithstanding, but wouldn't that open them up to libel lawsuits?

The bankers' behavior is kinda to be expected. You tell them go ahead have fun take as big risks as you want we'll foot the losses they're gonna do just that very thing. And when it all blows up in their face they can cry too big to fail, financial instability, great depression oogy boogy and get their bailouts. Then pay them back by being first in line for T-Bill auctions then reselling them and using those profits for repayment

Banks have a tendency to become very corrupt but people seem to forget that they don't want to store quantities of currency in their home and kind of like being able to purchase things without being required to have the entire bill up front in cash. Much less our financial system is really the only thing keeping us a superpower. There are tremendous perks to having the world's reserve currency and biggest banking system. You don't want to be around when that is no longer the case

MooseUpNorth:Geotpf: One problem with articles like this is they never list any specific people who "should" have been prosecuted but weren't. The number could be zero, for all I know. Give some specifics, man, not "bankers suck and the government sucks" generic crap.

No GED in law, and Nancy Grace notwithstanding, but wouldn't that open them up to libel lawsuits?

Maybe in some place like Great Britain (whose libel laws are so bad the US passed a law preventing using US courts to collect a UK libel lawsuit), but not in the United States. The truth, or even an honest attempt to find the truth (even if it turns out to include false info that they honestly believed was true) is a 100% defense against a libel lawsuit in the United States. Free speech protections are very strong in the US.

generallyso:In the case of HSBC, caught red-handed laundering money for terrorists and drug cartels the "Justice" Department actually said they were too big to jail:

"Had the U.S. authorities decided to press criminal charges," said Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer at a press conference to announce the settlement, "HSBC would almost certainly have lost its banking license in the U.S., the future of the institution would have been under threat and the entire banking system would have been destabilized."

bearsrepeating.jpg

which is really important ...wait, a Kardashian scissored with Miley ? hold on...

Geotpf:The problem is, if you shut down all or most of the largest banks in the country, unemployment would go to 25% or so overnight. The point of a bank is that it loans money to other companies and individuals; if all of those people and companies started having serious trouble getting loans, the economy would crash and another recession would start.

Their investments wouldn't disappear overnight. They might get tied up for a while, and there would be significant impact, but I doubt 25% unemployment (didn't get that high when trillions vanished overnight, did it?) and a total freeze of the monetary system.

I think the bigger problem comes when people have no faith in the high-finance system (well, I'd assume most of us don't already) - but then again, once you've got the table minimum, it appears you lose some part of your humanity. The only ones who care don't matter; and the only ones who matter don't care.

That's supposed to be where the courts come in, but it appears they don't care much, either.

Deathfrogg:socoloco: Deathfrogg: Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.

Wake up. You're dreaming. Time to go to work.

Can't sleep anyway, I have a Mathematics midterm tomorrow.

midterm? it's time for finals at the local University. What kind of schedule are you on?

Deathfrogg:Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.

Because corporations are people that have a constitutional right to due process.

/In before someone on the right says "Why do you want to jail job creators" and someone on the left says "obstructionist Republicans prevented Obama from carrying out justice."

TwowheelinTim:Deathfrogg: socoloco: Deathfrogg: Since when do we need to prosecute these companies at all? The Constitution provides the means for States and the Federal governments to merely cancel the Corporations charters if they become a danger to the Republic. No trial is needed. All it takes is an act of the relevant legislative body. A simple majority vote. fark prosecuting them, just yank their charters, seize their assets and auction them off to pay off the investors. Those laws are almost as old as the Constitution itself.

Wake up. You're dreaming. Time to go to work.

Can't sleep anyway, I have a Mathematics midterm tomorrow.

midterm? it's time for finals at the local University. What kind of schedule are you on?

Sounds like a quarter system to me. Spring quarter started in late March or early April, midterms might be around the beginning of May, and finals would be 1st or 2d week of June, depending on the specifics.